Curious George
Veteran Member
I am always fair.that's Western police how treat the suspect
this is my point about this thread , how police treated suspect, when she/he become a real threat in position and time .
she back and say by Arabic (Father i don't die) ,they come closer and surround her , and she did not stab anyone while she get mass .
can we be fair for a minute , she did not attack them why they mass shoot her ?
Police recognize a person with a weapon.
Police ask the person to drop the weapon.
Person refuses.
Police repeatedly demand the weapon be dropped.
Person refuses to comply.
The threat is real. The police are trying to contain the threat. The only thing I think one can fairly suggest, is that the police should have used less lethal force. But the woman lives. So they did not necessarily use lethal force. Did they use rubber bullets? There are several methods that they could have employed if those tools were available. Rubber bullets, taser, pepper paintballs, directional sound, etc. I don't know if any of these means were available but if not they should be.
But without question, a person waving a knife not responding to police commands represents a threat that the police NEED to isolate, contain, and remove. Police should not be forced to risk great bodily injury if such can be reasonably avoided.
What exactly did the police do wrong? Too many shots? Perhaps. If they used lethal force when alternatives were available, I could see that complaint. But beyond those two things, the police saw a threat and removed a threat. Do we know if these police have tasers or rubber bullets available? If not, then they used the tools they did have, without killing the female aggressor.